I get annoyed by the term "system of systems". To me it reeks of [[Systems Thinking]] people trying to outclass each other. My argument is that the term [[What is a System|system]] is not definable in a way that sets clear boundaries for drawing a line beyond which a "system" becomes a "system of systems". All systems are made up of components. All components are made up of subcomponents. What makes a "system" and what makes a "component" is simply an [[Arbitrary Distinction]] between frames of reference.
I asked ChatGPT for an argument in favor of the existence of the term - it provided the following justifications, which I suppose are valid.
## ChatGPT's Argument in Favor of the Term
Despite the vagueness, people use **“system of systems”** as a way to **signal a specific class of problems** or **design characteristics**, especially in engineering and large-scale planning. It usually implies:
|Feature|Implication|
|---|---|
|**Operational Independence**|Each system can operate on its own|
|**Managerial Independence**|Different orgs/departments own each part|
|**Evolutionary Development**|Parts can be upgraded independently|
|**Emergent Behavior**|New capabilities arise only when systems work together|
|**Distributed Control**|No single point of control or governance|
****
# More
## Source
- Myself arguing with ChatGPT